Dr. Badal Kumar Maity vs State Of West Bengal & Ors

Arindam Mukherjee, J

The writ petitioner has challenged an order dated 17th June, 2020 issued by the President, Bagnan College Governing Body, Bagnan, Howrah, by

which the governing body of the said college placed the petitioner under suspension and requested the petitioner not to enter the college office for any

purpose excepting the requirement for the purpose of the enquiry committee.

Mr. Basu, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that a suspension order can be challenged under three exceptions -if

the suspension order is tainted with malafide, if it is without jurisdiction or perverse on face of record. In the instant case, it explicits from the fact that

the governing body of the college had to convene an urgent meeting even in a pandemic situation only for the purpose of rejecting the reply given by

the petitioner an to place the petitioner under suspension. The act alleged as against the petitioner forming the basis of suspension cannot be under any

stretch of imagination be said to be misconduct for which a disciplinary proceeding can be held. The main allegation is that as the Principal of Bagnan

College, the petitioner failed to fix the pay of four staff/employees of the said college. The learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner cites

the judgement reported in 2005(2) CHN 468 to demonstrate that the suspension of a principal of a college is a serious issue considering the fact that

the governing body which is suspending the principal comprises of subordinates and the principal himself is as ex officio member of such governing

body. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the suspension order is required to be quashed and for the time being should be stayed.

On behalf of the governing body it is submitted that suspension does not amount to a removal of a person from service. On finding some acts of

omissions for the purpose of conducting an enquiry a person can be suspended so that the evidence and other materials connected to the enquiry

cannot be tampered with in any manner. It is further submitted by the governing body that a teacher in charge has been appointed in the place and

stead of the suspended principal -petitioner which has been duly approved by the competent authority.

After hearing the parties and considering the materials on record, I find that a previous round of litigation is going on between the petitioner and the

governing body including the State authorities wherein some issues may be interlinked.

At this stage, without calling for affidavit the suspension order of the petitioner cannot be stayed or interfered with. However, the appointment of the

teacher-in-charge in place and stead of the petitioner shall be subject to the result of the instant writ petition. The governing body and the competent

authority shall clarify that the appointment of the teacher-in- charge in the place and stead of the petitioner shall be subject to the result of the instant

writ petition.

The order of suspension reveals that there is a contemplation of disciplinary proceeding as against the petitioner. The same is yet to be initiated. In the

event the authority concern under the West Bengal College Teachers (Security of Service) Act, 1975 decides to hold an enquiry as against the

petitioner, on the basis of the allegations which has led to the petitioner's suspension, such decisions shall be taken within a period of fortnight from

date and communicated to the petitioner. If the authority concern intends to conduct a proceeding as against the petitioner, the articles of charges shall

be served on the petitioner within 31st July, 2020. The authority shall appoint the enquiry officer and the presenting officer for the enquiry proceedings

if any within three weeks from date. The authority shall also supply all documents necessary for the petitioner to reply to the allegations contained in

the charge-sheet along with charge-sheet. If any additional document is required by the petitioner for replying to the alleged charges the authority

concern shall within a period of one week from the receipt of the request from the petitioner shall supply such documents. The petitioner shall be at

liberty to use his objection to the charge within 31st August, 2020. The petitioner can in such objection agitate the illegality of the suspension order.

The enquiry officer, if the case proceeds to such stage, shall commence the enquiry proceeding immediately after the pleadings are completed but not

later than 10th September, 2020. The enquiry proceedings, if it is required to be conducted, shall be completed by 20th October, 2020. The disciplinary

authority within 30 November, 2020 shall give his decision. At all stages if a proceedings is initiated against the petitioner, the principle of natural

justice to be adhered to including giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. It is made clear that in case of default of any of the directions

regarding the contemplated disciplinary proceedings the petitioner shall be at liberty to seek discharge of the same.

It is made clear that the petitioner shall be provided with the subsistence allowance and the same shall be calculated in terms of the statutory norms.

The petitioner, if succeeds in the instant writ petition it is needless to say that the petitioner shall be provided with full pay and all allowance including

the arrears with interest @ 8 % per annum.

The petitioner will be at liberty for pray early hearing of the matter and also make representations for withdrawal of the suspension.

The respondents shall be at liberty to use an affidavit in respect of the instant writ petition within a period of three weeks from date. Reply if any,

within two weeks thereafter.

Let this matter appear on any date after six weeks subject to convenience of the Court.

It is expected that the petitioner should cooperate for early disposal of the disciplinary proceedings.